RE: [Xen-devel] RE: BUG() w/ HVM win2k3 64b

["Woller, Thomas" <thomas.woller@xxxxxxx>]

> 16489 and 16491 are obviously suspects. You might also try current tip
> (-rc5) as some emulator bugs were fixed in the last day or 
> so. 
16491 just failed a few mins ago.  16490 passed at 9 hours, although
could use more time.
We are down to 3 1P test systems available for use till next week, and
will start up:
1) 16701 minus 16491
2) 16701
3) 16701

And let them run overnight, which *should* be enough time.  If above all
fail, we'll have to go back and work with 16489/16490 more closely with
more time in test.

> Was your successful 16488 test stressful enough to be 
> confident that it's not a false negative (for the bug)?
Yes, 2 systems confirmed 16488 passed.   Btw 3.1.3 passes also.

tom

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 2:56 PM
> To: Woller, Thomas; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] RE: BUG() w/ HVM win2k3 64b
> 
> 16489 and 16491 are obviously suspects. You might also try current tip
> (-rc5) as some emulator bugs were fixed in the last day or 
> so. Was your successful 16488 test stressful enough to be 
> confident that it's not a false negative (for the bug)?
> 
>  -- Keir
> 
> On 10/1/08 19:36, "Woller, Thomas" <thomas.woller@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >> We have seen failures with changesets >= 16492, latest tested was 
> >> 16676 that fails, and c/s 16488 passes without issue.
> > clarification to my email, was thinking that c/s 16491 was 
> the problem 
> > (not 16492 as I indicated),
> > 
> > 16492 has failed tests, and 16491 c/s is running fine right 
> now - but 
> > need more test time on that c/s to see if it will fail.
> > 
> > So, just to be clear, still don't have a handle on which 
> specific c/s 
> > is the problem, but still seems around 1649x-ish
> > 
> > Tom
> > 
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Woller, Thomas
> >> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 1:18 PM
> >> To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Cc: Woller, Thomas
> >> Subject: BUG() w/ HVM win2k3 64b
> >> 
> >> We are observing a BUG() with 3.2/unstable.  This problem takes a 
> >> number of hours to reproduce - anywhere from 4 to 12+ 
> hours, and only 
> >> with windows 2003 64b HVM multi-vcpu guest so far under 
> heavy stress 
> >> load.
> >> 
> >> Only reproduceable using Shadow Paging, we have not see 
> the problem 
> >> using nested paging.
> >> 
> >> We have seen failures with changesets >= 16492, latest tested was 
> >> 16676 that fails, and c/s 16488 passes without issue.
> >> 
> >> We have tried to narrow down the issue to a specific 
> changeset, and 
> >> overnight testing seems to indicate that changeset 14692 
> might be the 
> >> culprit.  Not quite confirmed until additional testing completes 
> >> tomorrow on c/s 14691 and 14690.  We will know more EOD 
> thursday if 
> >> these 2 pass testing.
> >> 
> >> We will startup some testing using 16701 also to make sure 
> that it is 
> >> not resolved with post 16676 patches.  I'll also try to startup a 
> >> test with removing c/s 16492 from 16701 base and see if that helps 
> >> this specific problem.  All of this testing though will not finish 
> >> till towards end of next week due to largescale move of 
> lab/offices 
> >> starting tomorrow - and with 3.2 almost out, would like to 
> see this 
> >> figured out before release.
> >> 
> >> Reproduced on 1P family11h and family10h systems, but unable to 
> >> reproduce on 2P+ systems so far.  We don't believe we are
> >> seeing any sort of h/w anomoly at this point.   have not
> >> tried reproducing on VT boxes.
> >> 
> >> We are able to reproduce using 2 64b windows Guests, 
> currently we are 
> >> using 2 or 4 VCPUs, but have not tried reducing to single VCPU.
> >> 
> >> Any debug thoughts are appreciated.
> >> 
> >> Looks like the dst.mem.seg is invalid for the read() in 
> Grp5 case 2/4 
> >> (jmp/call), which results in the BUG() later.
> >> 
> >> X86_emulate:
> >> ...
> >>     case 0xff: /* Grp5 */
> >>         switch ( modrm_reg & 7 )
> >>         {
> >>         case 0: /* inc */
> >>             emulate_1op("inc", dst, _regs.eflags);
> >>             break;
> >>         case 1: /* dec */
> >>             emulate_1op("dec", dst, _regs.eflags);
> >>             break;
> >>         case 2: /* call (near) */
> >>         case 4: /* jmp (near) */
> >>             dst.type = OP_NONE;
> >>             if ( (dst.bytes != 8) && mode_64bit() )
> >>             {
> >>                 dst.bytes = op_bytes = 8;
> >>                 if ( dst.type == OP_REG )
> >>                     dst.val = *dst.reg;
> >>                 else if ( (rc = ops->read(dst.mem.seg, dst.mem.off,
> >>                                           &dst.val, 8, 
> ctxt)) != 0 )
> >>                     goto done;
> >>          
> >> 
> >> Guest config:
> >> HVM Windows 2003 64b
> >> vcpus=4
> >> memory=1024
> >> pae/acpi/apic=1
> >> 
> >> BUG() info.
> >> (XEN) Xen BUG at svm.c:599
> >> (XEN) ----[ Xen-3.2.0-rc3  x86_64  debug=n  Tainted:    C ]----
> >> (XEN) CPU:    2
> >> (XEN) RIP:    e008:[<ffff828c80165205>]
> >> svm_get_segment_register+0x145/0x170
> >> (XEN) RFLAGS: 0000000000010292   CONTEXT: hypervisor
> >> (XEN) rax: ffff8300a6e0ff28   rbx: ffff8300a7dde000   rcx:
> >> 00000000a6e0fa28
> >> (XEN) rdx: ffff830b14f09f54   rsi: 00000000a6e0fa28   rdi:
> >> ffff8300a7ddc080
> >> (XEN) rbp: ffff830b14f09f54   rsp: ffff8300a6e0f850   r8:
> >> ffff8300a6e0fc98
> >> (XEN) r9:  ffff8300a6e0f8c8   r10: 0000000000000000   r11:
> >> 0000000000000001
> >> (XEN) r12: ffff8300a6e0f8c8   r13: 0000000000000001   r14:
> >> 00000000a6e0fa28
> >> (XEN) r15: 0000000000000008   cr0: 0000000080050033   cr4:
> >> 00000000000006f0
> >> (XEN) cr3: 000000003b75b000   cr2: 000000000247f000
> >> (XEN) ds: 0000   es: 0000   fs: 0053   gs: 002b   ss: 0000 
>   cs: e008
> >> (XEN) Xen stack trace from rsp=ffff8300a6e0f850:
> >> (XEN)    ffff830b14f09f54 0000000000000000 ffff828c80178eea
> >> ffff8300a6e0fc98
> >> (XEN)    ffff828c80179d0c ffff8300a6e0f8d0 ffff8300a6e0fb20
> >> 0000000000000001
> >> (XEN)    0000000000000008 ffff8300a6e0fc98 ffff8300a6e0fc98
> >> 0000000000000004
> >> (XEN)    ffff828c80179e46 0000000000000000 fffffadff3c54040
> >> fffffadff04cbde0
> >> (XEN)    0000000000000002 ffff828c801c18e0 0000000000000008
> >> 0000000000000000
> >> (XEN)    ffff828c80146be5 0000000000000001 ffff8300a6e0ff28
> >> 000000003a4002e7
> >> (XEN)    00000002a6e0fb87 ffff8300a6e0fbc8 0000001100000000
> >> 0000000080a572b0
> >> (XEN)    ffff8300a6e0f9d8 ffff828c801c18e0 0000000000000000
> >> 0000000000000000
> >> (XEN)    00000006a6e0fbc8 fffff80000812be8 0000468c8015a2b0
> >> ffff8300a6e0fb03
> >> (XEN)    0000000000000296 0000000000000002 ffff8300a7dd2080
> >> 0000000000000000
> >> (XEN)    ffff828c8013974a 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff
> >> ffff830000000046
> >> (XEN)    ffff8300a7dd37e0 fffffadff04cbe00 fffffadff04cbd70
> >> ffff8300a7dcd7e0
> >> (XEN)    ffff828c80161206 fffff80000341070 fffffadff410d040
> >> 0000000000000000
> >> (XEN)    fffffadff41171f0 0000000000000080 fffffadff35ce040
> >> fffff78000000008
> >> (XEN)    0000000000000000 0000000000000000 fffffadff35ce040
> >> fffffadff1a73010
> >> (XEN)    fffffadff3699f90 fffffadff3699f90 fffffadff35ce040
> >> fffffadff3c54040
> >> (XEN)    0000000000000003 fffff80001272bae 0000000000000000
> >> 0000000000000246
> >> (XEN)    fffffadff04cbd70 0000000000000000 5555555555555555
> >> 5555555555555555
> >> (XEN)    5555555555555555 5555555555555555 00000001801324cd
> >> 0000000000000004
> >> (XEN)    ffffffffffffffff ffff8300a7ddc080 000fffff80001272
> >> ffff8300a6e0fba4
> >> (XEN) Xen call trace:
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80165205>] svm_get_segment_register+0x145/0x170
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80178eea>] hvm_get_seg_reg+0x3a/0x40
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80179d0c>] hvm_translate_linear_addr+0x3c/0xa0
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80179e46>] hvm_read+0x36/0xe0
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80146be5>] x86_emulate+0x3f35/0x9940
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c8013974a>] smp_send_event_check_mask+0x3a/0x40
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80161206>] vlapic_write+0x546/0x7e0
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c8017f3f5>]
> >> sh_gva_to_gfn__shadow_4_guest_4+0xc5/0x150
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80152d27>] __hvm_copy+0x97/0x280
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c8017f2ba>] guest_walk_tables+0x80a/0x880
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c8017a206>] shadow_init_emulation+0x126/0x160
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80182bd5>]
> >> sh_page_fault__shadow_4_guest_4+0xdb5/0xe80
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80128259>] context_switch+0xb79/0xbc0
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c8016753c>] svm_vmexit_handler+0x6ac/0x1a70
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c801160bf>] schedule+0x25f/0x290
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c8015fcbd>] vlapic_has_pending_irq+0x2d/0x70
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c80163dc6>] svm_intr_assist+0x46/0x140
> >> (XEN)    [<ffff828c801692d4>] svm_stgi_label+0x8/0x14
> >> (XEN)    
> >> (XEN)
> >> (XEN) ****************************************
> >> (XEN) Panic on CPU 2:
> >> (XEN) Xen BUG at svm.c:599
> >> (XEN) ****************************************
> >> (XEN)
> >> (XEN) Manual reset required ('noreboot' specified)
> >> 
> >>   --Tom
> >> 
> >> thomas.woller@xxxxxxx  +1-512-602-0059 AMD Corporation - Operating 
> >> Systems Research Center
> >> 5204 E. Ben White Blvd. UBC1
> >> Austin, Texas 78741
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel